Your lead article [Times, May 31] warns that 1117 trees and 33,000sqm of vegetation may be lost for rapid transport to the airport.
This must not happen. It will cause more warming in the localised area (cities are hotter than vegetation as they radiate heat).
We need every tree in the struggle against climate change; the number of users benefiting occasionally will be small – those going to the airport – compared to the tens of thousands negatively impacted all the time by this plan.
In non-peak time it is not needed.
We should be flying less (lesson from Covid) and reducing our emissions, using zoom for business and families flying outside peak times.
Already we are feeling the pinch of suburb densification – single houses being developed with up to 8 stands with all vegetation taken out.
Our schools cannot cope and nor can our roads. Let’s rather have two or three units on the average stand allowing a better balance for some green space, more capacity for parking.
Improving public transport that benefits the whole community and promotes higher usage is still needed, but in this case please think again.